Trust in our Institutions

[Eaglelord17]

Like the current PM saying “This is the last first past the post election”, the political parties seem to always defer what is best for them vice what is best for the institution. So we’ll never get reform, unless the backbenchers of all parties get a come to Jesus moment and impose the power that they have collectively to force this issue.
But I might as well wish for skittle farting unicorns to come to my birthday party, I’m getting the same result.

Leaving first past the post isn’t always better. It just creates a bunch of new issues to deal with which can sometimes be worse than the previous ones.

Where we would likely do better as a society is enacting reforms to allow referendums like the Swiss and give much more power to the people. First past the post is sufficient to elect the law makers, only the Swiss system actively holds them accountable (as opposed to 4 years of whatever they want followed by a election).

 

[dimsum]

Leaving first past the post isn’t always better. It just creates a bunch of new issues to deal with which can sometimes be worse than the previous ones.

Where we would likely do better as a society is enacting reforms to allow referendums like the Swiss and give much more power to the people. First past the post is sufficient to elect the law makers, only the Swiss system actively holds them accountable (as opposed to 4 years of whatever they want followed by a election).

Australia enters the chat

 

[FSTO]

New York Times has a comment.

A Critical Gap in Democracy? ‘Yawn,’ Say Canadian Politicians.

China and India have been accused of exploiting the opaque nomination contests of Canadian political parties to meddle in elections.

www.nytimes.com

 

[lenaitch]

Leaving first past the post isn’t always better. It just creates a bunch of new issues to deal with which can sometimes be worse than the previous ones.

Where we would likely do better as a society is enacting reforms to allow referendums like the Swiss and give much more power to the people. First past the post is sufficient to elect the law makers, only the Swiss system actively holds them accountable (as opposed to 4 years of whatever they want followed by a election).

I agree. We could see a lot of improvements if we were able to de-fang/de-power the PMO and return power to the caucus and committees, but I don't know how that could be accomplished.

 

[Fabius]

Constitutional reform would be key.

The senate needs to be modified to allow it to exercise its power in a manner that is understood to be legitimate by citizens.

The PM needs to have most of the position’s ability to appoint personnel to key posts removed and done by parliamentary committee’s subject to ratification by the house etc etc.

Elections Canada needs to have a key role in overseeing nominations for parties and the leaders should not have veto over the nomination process.

Those steps are the most immediate ones that come to mind to rein in the PMO and reestablish some checks and balances to our system.

We need someone more interested in Canada than being in charge to become PM to do that though, and it would be an ugly mess to make it happen with lots of unforeseen consequences. That’s highly unlikely to happen though.

 

[The Bread Guy]

… Where we would likely do better as a society is enacting reforms to allow referendums like the Swiss and give much more power to the people …

Careful what you wish for, though, when you consider where half of Canada’s population lives …

…and how many votes they’d wield for national-scope “answers” to questions.

For example, don’t know how many people in the “red arrowhead” would vote for, say, looser gun control if that was on a national referendum.

 

[dapaterson]

Careful what you wish for, though, when you consider where half of Canada’s population lives …
View attachment 86752
…and how many votes they’d wield for national-scope “answers” to questions.

For example, don’t know how many people in the “red arrowhead” would vote for, say, looser gun control if that was on a national referendum.

The folks in Southern New Brunswick might...

 

[Fabius]

Careful what you wish for, though, when you consider where half of Canada’s population lives …
View attachment 86752
…and how many votes they’d wield for national-scope “answers” to questions.

For example, don’t know how many people in the “red arrowhead” would vote for, say, looser gun control if that was on a national referendum.

Agreed. I don’t think we have anything close to the same social and regional homogeneity that the Swiss cantons do. I think a lot of problems would emerge from the choices the majority would make, ie what’s seen as best for the GTA, Lower Mainland and Montreal.
Given the last 10-20 years I am not convinced I would have much trust in the majority population in those areas to make decisions that would be beneficial to Canada as a whole.

Democracy and liberalism ( Not LPC but classical liberalism) are not irrevocably linked and there is no guarantee that Canada shall forever be routed in the principles of western enlightenment values.

Democratic liberalism is not about the procedure of selecting a government or how decisions get made but about a governments goals as well.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Leaving first past the post isn’t always better. It just creates a bunch of new issues to deal with which can sometimes be worse than the previous ones.

Where we would likely do better as a society is enacting reforms to allow referendums like the Swiss and give much more power to the people. First past the post is sufficient to elect the law makers, only the Swiss system actively holds them accountable (as opposed to 4 years of whatever they want followed by a election).

The Swiss require a period of service as a conscript before you can vote. How would that go down in Canada?

Many states in Continental Europe are not such great examples of democracy and freedom if you take some time to look under the hood

 

[The Bread Guy]

The folks in Southern New Brunswick might...

Yeah, that’ll mobilize the wildly & traditionally urban conservative 416/905 vote

 

[Eaglelord17]

Careful what you wish for, though, when you consider where half of Canada’s population lives …
View attachment 86752
…and how many votes they’d wield for national-scope “answers” to questions.

For example, don’t know how many people in the “red arrowhead” would vote for, say, looser gun control if that was on a national referendum.

Generally their referendums work to either loosen/get rid of laws or allow governments to do things (such as levy taxes).

It doesn’t allow the public to create laws, thats the politicians gig. This results in always favouring de-regulation/control. It could have resulted in weed being legalized decades earlier, or our gun control laws never reaching this point.

Can’t be worse than currently when a very small number of people have absolute say. Usually 33-38% of the voters so like 20-25% of the population and even then they really don’t have a say once the people are elected in.

Any attempt to make proportional voting systems just end up with giant messes, a billion parties, and usually a couple crazy ones who end up as king makers forcing though policies most the population wants nothing to do with.

The Swiss require a period of service as a conscript before you can vote. How would that go down in Canada? Many states in Continental Europe are not such great examples of democracy and freedom if you take some time to look under the hood

The Swiss vote to require conscription, just as they vote to allow the government to levy taxes. They could also vote to cancel that if they wished to.

Unlike many democracies who are just running off old charters, laws, and policies written and passed by people long dead, the Swiss require constant renewal and buy in from their population.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Generally their referendums work to either loosen/get rid of laws or allow governments to do things (such as levy taxes).

It doesn’t allow the public to create laws, thats the politicians gig. This results in always favouring de-regulation/control. It could have resulted in weed being legalized decades earlier, or our gun control laws never reaching this point.

Can’t be worse than currently when a very small number of people have absolute say. Usually 33-38% of the voters so like 20-25% of the population and even then they really don’t have a say once the people are elected in.

Any attempt to make proportional voting systems just end up with giant messes, a billion parties, and usually a couple crazy ones who end up as king makers forcing though policies most the population wants nothing to do with.


The Swiss vote to require conscription, just as they vote to allow the government to levy taxes. They could also vote to cancel that if they wished to.

Unlike many democracies who are just running off old charters, laws, and policies written and passed by people long dead, the Swiss require constant renewal and buy in from their population.

I'm not a Swiss basher, Switzerland is awesome, but then there's the systemic racism... amongst other issues

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/switzerland-has-systemic-racism-issues-un-experts-say-2022-10-03/#:~:text=GENEVA%2C%20Oct%203%20(Reuters),brutality%20to%20a%20children's%20game.

Like Nazi gold...

Swiss Acknowledge Profiting From Nazi Gold (Published 1996)

Swiss National Bank acknowledges that it profited to amount of about 20 million Swiss francs from dealings with Nazi Germany's central bank during World War II; vice president Jean-Pierre Roth insists there is no evidence that gold from concentration camp victims was involved; also denies bank...

www.nytimes.com

 

[Halifax Tar]

Leaving first past the post isn’t always better. It just creates a bunch of new issues to deal with which can sometimes be worse than the previous ones.

Where we would likely do better as a society is enacting reforms to allow referendums like the Swiss and give much more power to the people. First past the post is sufficient to elect the law makers, only the Swiss system actively holds them accountable (as opposed to 4 years of whatever they want followed by a election).

I think you're on to something.

Careful what you wish for, though, when you consider where half of Canada’s population lives …
View attachment 86752
…and how many votes they’d wield for national-scope “answers” to questions.

For example, don’t know how many people in the “red arrowhead” would vote for, say, looser gun control if that was on a national referendum.

The power to direct the whole country needs to be taken from that silo.

That's too much density in a small area to allow appropriate representation for the vastness of our country and it's differing issues and needs of its people.

That's a silo.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I think you're on to something.



The power to direct the whole country needs to be taken from that silo.

That's too much density in a small area to allow appropriate representation for the vastness of our country and it's differing issues and needs of its people.

That's a silo.

Not that I think that the ideas out of the GTA have been awesome for Canada as a whole lately, but how fair (and stable) would a system be that takes away representation from half the Canadian Population?

I think part of the solution is a Senate that is approximately regionally representative to at least propose amendments.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Not that I think that the ideas out of the GTA have been awesome for Canada as a whole lately, but how fair (and stable) would a system be that takes away representation from half the Canadian Population?

I think part of the solution is a Senate that is approximately regionally representative to at least propose amendments.

If we were doing what's fair PEI wouldn't have the representation it has already.

I get your point. I think the "hinterlands" (anywhere outside that triangle) are basically ignored, and that's not good for our confederation. Our cracks are showing. And part of fixing that means that concentration of electoral power needs to be broken up and redistributed.

Its just my opinion, and I dont think its about to happen. That part of country will let the whole confederation fail before it cedes its grip on our electoral system and country.

 

[The Bread Guy]

... I think the "hinterlands" (anywhere outside that triangle) are basically ignored, and that's not good for our confederation ...

That right there - urban-rural, centre-periphery has been a thing for ages in Canada, which isn't surprising considering it's geography and where people live vs. where decisions are made. And not JUST "everyone hates Toronto/the Eastern bits", either. I'm guessing in different parts of Canada, the smaller communities (500-2,000 population) complain about decisions made in the larger (75K-100K population) ones, too.

It's finding the right balance between not letting a small minority lead the rest by the nose on some issues and letting the majority bulldoze the rest on others. Ah, the messiness of federation ...

... I think part of the solution is a Senate that is approximately regionally representative to at least propose amendments.

That could help, depending on the makeup/powers, for sure.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Generally their referendums work to either loosen/get rid of laws or allow governments to do things (such as levy taxes).

It doesn’t allow the public to create laws, thats the politicians gig. This results in always favouring de-regulation/control. It could have resulted in weed being legalized decades earlier, or our gun control laws never reaching this point ...

Generally, maybe, but not always - this from about 5 years ago ...

Switzerland votes for tighter gun laws by large margin

Motion to line up county’s laws with EU rules passed with 64% of votes, initial results show

www.theguardian.com

Gun lobby misses its target as Swiss voters approve tougher gun control

Voters have endorsed a controversial reform of Swiss gun law to bring it in line with security regulations of the EU.

www.swissinfo.ch

Swiss voters approve tighter gun laws, lining up with the EU

The Swiss proposal, among other things, requires regular training on the use of firearms, special waivers to own some semi-automatic weapons and serial number tracking system for key parts of some guns. Gun owners would have to register any weapons not already registered within three years, and...

www.pbs.org

Given this result, if I were a law-abiding gun owner in Canada, I'd be leery about any full referendum on that particular issue.

... Can’t be worse than currently when a very small number of people have absolute say. Usually 33-38% of the voters so like 20-25% of the population and even then they really don’t have a say once the people are elected in ...

Sadly, I wish I had a better answer for you on increasing voter turnout, but I'm just as frustrated as you seem to be, and I got nothing for answers. Australia seems to have something approaching mandatory voting in at least some jurisdictions, but I don't know about any down sides to that.

... Any attempt to make proportional voting systems just end up with giant messes, a billion parties, and usually a couple crazy ones who end up as king makers forcing though policies most the population wants nothing to do with ...

Especially in today's world of nobody wanting to compromise or approach the middle with any solutions at risk of being called "heretic" or "traitor" by the most extreme elements of their respective side.

 

[Halifax Tar]

That right there - urban-rural, centre-periphery has been a thing for ages in Canada, which isn't surprising considering it's geography and where people live vs. where decisions are made.

I'm not sure if this was poorly worded, or I don't understand it, but there is civilization a urban centers out of that triangle in Canada.

 

[Eaglelord17]

Generally, maybe, but not always - this from about 5 years ago ...

Switzerland votes for tighter gun laws by large margin

Motion to line up county’s laws with EU rules passed with 64% of votes, initial results show

www.theguardian.com

Gun lobby misses its target as Swiss voters approve tougher gun control

Voters have endorsed a controversial reform of Swiss gun law to bring it in line with security regulations of the EU.

www.swissinfo.ch

Swiss voters approve tighter gun laws, lining up with the EU

The Swiss proposal, among other things, requires regular training on the use of firearms, special waivers to own some semi-automatic weapons and serial number tracking system for key parts of some guns. Gun owners would have to register any weapons not already registered within three years, and...

www.pbs.org

Given this result, if I were a law-abiding gun owner in Canada, I'd be leery about any full referendum on that particular issue.

There is the reason they had that referendum though. Basically the EU was going to remove free market access and transportation if they didn’t.

I don’t see that as a vote necessarily on gun control as much as jobs and the economy.

At least they had a say, if that was Canada and the US for whatever arbitrary reason said no more free trade unless you tightened the gun laws, every single one of our politicians would vote to tighten them without any individuals getting a say.

 

[Good2Golf]

I think part of the solution is a Senate that is approximately regionally representative to at least propose amendments.

I get your point. I think the "hinterlands" (anywhere outside that triangle) are basically ignored, and that's not good for our confederation. Our cracks are showing. And part of fixing that means that concentration of electoral power needs to be broken up and redistributed.

Like SKT notes…even the US, the upper house has equal representation by all States of the Republic. Maybe part of the *electoral reform that Trudeau promised (checks watch…nearly a decade ago), would include an element of equal (at least, and elected?) Senate?

That right there - urban-rural, centre-periphery has been a thing for ages in Canada, which isn't surprising considering it's geography and where people live vs. where decisions are made. And not JUST "everyone hates Toronto/the Eastern bits", either. I'm guessing in different parts of Canada, the smaller communities (500-2,000 population) complain about decisions made in the larger (75K-100K population) ones, too.

‘Up island’ often doesn’t speak glowingly of Victoria…